Fallout 3 wins big at GameCritics

[Brother None]

I personally find handing out awards for best showings at game conventions to be one of the most asinine concepts in existence, but in case anyone cares about this vapidity, the Game Critics Awards 2008 Best of Show and Best RPG both went to Fallout 3. BethBlog reminds us that Oblivion also won best RPG in 2005, which will be very telling to most of you in either a positive or negative way.

 

[Brother None]

Sorry for the overly negative tone, oh neutral readers of NMA, but game show awards are so, so goddamn stupid.

They're roughly at the intelligence level of awards for best advertisements, but with more hype.

 

[generalissimofurioso]

And the award for best soft drink advertisement goes to...

"They call me Mr. Pibb!"

I wish I had the power to give awards to games that aren't even out yet.

Then people might finally listen to my insane ramblings.

 

[alec]

They're roughly at the intelligence level of awards for best advertisements, but with more hype.

Hey... I think I get it.
It's like saying that Obama is one of the best Presidents of the US of A because he brought all that c-h-a-n-g-e to the American people, right?



Am I right?



That said, I think FO3 is way better than FO or FO2. I haven't played it yet, nor will I ever do so, but it's definitely better. It just has that je-ne-sais-quoi that makes it stand out. Therefore, I strongly suggest it should get even more awards. And Seals of Approval as well. And holy blessings. And other ... prizes.

BTW: FO3 sold way more copies than FO and FO2 combined. FACT!

 

[ArmorB]

Well you know it's going to have at least 3-4 gold stickers touting awards on the cover...and with that many stickers it has to be good.

 

[Ar.Pi]

I just checked the nominees for RPG and there is absolutely nothing in E3 this year. Except maybe Dragon Age which they showed jack shit of.


The most amazing thing about this award is that its for RPG, and we've been shown absolutely nothing role-playing!


Best of show i can understand. There was so much "WOW" effect that they had to give this to them.

 

[ookami]

Well you know it's going to have at least 3-4 gold stickers touting awards on the cover...and with that many stickers it has to be good.

I wish I could see the name of this game or any of the description on the back of the box, but all the goddamn stickers are covering it. Gosh, they must have done well on their spelling and been well-behaved during potty break to get so many stickers.

 

[whirlingdervish]

maybe it was the teddy bear decapitation that won it for them..

 

[Black]

Shouldn't they like... wait until it's released before judging? I mean, hurf durf and shit, right?

 

[Brother None]

Shouldn't they like... wait until it's released before judging?

They're not judging the game, they're judging its presentation and how good it looked compared to other presentations.

Which is such an asinine, "who gives a fuck" thing to make an award for.

 

[Black]

Meh, maybe I misread it. I thought it was both for the show and the game. And the game isn't out yet.
Anyway, it's still stupid. But hey, more free hype.

 

[Ausir]

How do you know it's free?

 

[Ranne]

What needs to be mentioned is that Fallout 3 lost Best Console Game, wasn't even nominated for Best PC Game (Xbox only demo, presumably), wasn't nominated for Best Action Game or Best Action/Adventure Game, and that two of the other 4 Best RPG nominees were Nintendo DS games, a port of 1991's Chrono Trigger and Sonic Chronicles... That's, Sonic The Hedgehog, in case you're wandering.

 

[Per]

The awards are given to "games that will shape the future of interactive entertainment". So yes, they're rating the games.

 

[Polynikes]

Best of show i can understand. There was so much "WOW" effect that they had to give this to them.

That super-cool image showing their army of power armor guys alone gives them the best of show award for like the next 5 years.

Seriously, though, I really wonder how much all those stupid things cost. What a friggin' waste.

 

[UncannyGarlic]

Shouldn't they like... wait until it's released before judging? I mean, hurf durf and shit, right?

It's kind of like how when a huge budget movie producer like bruckheimer releases the trailers for a movie that is months away from being seen it says "NOMINATED FOR 5 ACADEMY AWARDS!" as though the fact that an unreleased movie that has yet to live up to it's own hype having already been nominated for the academy awards doesn't somehow completely invalidate them.

To be fair, most of the time there have been enough private screenings that it's conceivable that enough of the board of the Academy could have actually experienced the final product (watched the movie) to actually make an informed decision. Granted, there are other issues (such as all of the movies coming out between this one and the award ceremony/final vote) but at least they've experienced the finished product rather than a specific and very limited amount of an unfinished product.